Building bridges in the United States in the 1930s, during the Great Depression, was a dangerous job. For example, during the 1933–36 construction of the San Francisco‐Oakland Bay Bridge, a total of 24 workers died (Kerievsky, 2015). However, something was remarkably different about the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge. Built around the same time as the Bay Bridge, it was operated more like a modern construction site, especially in regards to safety11 Some of the groundbreaking safety precautions that were implemented in the building of the Golden Gate Bridge included: 1) adapting mining helmets for use in bridge construction to protect workers from errant flying objects, 2) employing a first of its kind, mandatory hardhat zone, 3) giving glare‐free goggles to protect the workers from blinding glare from the sun reflecting off the water, 4) supplying special cream to protect workers skin from wind burn, 5) providing innovative respirators for steel‐cleaning workers to protect them from inhaling hazardous materials, and 6) mandating the use of safety lines or face being fired (Kerievsky, 2015). . Joseph Strauss, chief architect for the bridge, used the latest safety equipment, employed safety training, procedures, and oversight as an integral part of the work, invented new safety equipment, and made safety procedures mandatory. Strauss believed that they “… could cheat death by providing every known safety device for workers” (Kerievsky, 2015).

When it came time to begin construction of the bridge's roadway, Strauss envisioned the most “expensive, elaborate safety device ever conceived for a major construction site” – a safety net that would be set up underneath the emerging roadway (Kerievsky, 2015, Figure 1). The cost of the net was $130,000 dollars, a rather large sum in those days, especially considering that the bridge was built during the dark economic days of the Great Depression. Despite its cost, Strauss fought hard for and won approval to employ the net. And what were the results, you ask? The presence of the safety net boosted morale22 “No matter how high up you were and how hard you might have been blown off, you would still fall into the net.” Quote from the video Worker Safety During Construction of the Golden Gate Bridge (Danieljbmitchell 2007). , sped up the work33 “The loss of life, the delays that would occur from men working slower because they had to be a bit more careful so they wouldn't fall, probably made the $130,000 dollars a very economic innovation.” Quote taken from the video entitled “Worker Safety During Construction of the Golden Gate Bridge” (Danieljbmitchell 2007). , and saved 19 lives44 The 19 men who fell from the Golden Gate Bridge and were saved by the safety net organized an exclusive club for themselves, calling it the Half Way to Hell Club (Half Way to Hell Club 2020). . In the end, only 11 men lost their lives55 During the first 44 months of the project, there were no deaths and few injuries. However, with only seven months remaining on the project, one worker was crushed by a support beam in October of 1936 and on February 16, 1937, a five‐ton platform collapsed, ripping through the safety net, sending 12 men plummeting 220 feet into the frigid waters below. Ten of those 12 workers died from the fall, bringing the total fatality count to 11 (Kerievsky, 2015). building the Golden Gate Bridge, which was much less than the projected number of 35, based on the rule of thumb in those days of 1 life lost for every million dollars spent. Today, the Golden Gate Bridge is an iconic symbol of the San Francisco Bay Area and, to those who know its history, a landmark for worker safety.

Though I really don't remember how or when I first learned of the safety net employed by Strauss and its successful outcomes, I have been recently pondering Strauss's revolutionary way of thinking, but not so much in regards to keeping bridge workers safe, but rather in relation to keeping students safe.

Though there are several aspects of student safety we could discuss, the area that is presently on my mind is academic safety. By academic safety, I mean making our classrooms a safe and authentic place for students to do their jobs. Just as the workers on the bridge felt physically safe to do their jobs, I want my students to feel academically safe to do their jobs – that is, their jobs of exploring, learning, growing, and changing. The intended purpose of the kind of academic safety I am talking about is not to coddle or cajole our students, but to help them become the best version of themselves, in and beyond the classroom.

Creating an environment in which all students feel academically safe is a tall order. Students come to us in all “shapes and sizes,” so‐to‐speak, and they bring with them such diverse backgrounds and abilities. Though we need to think beyond a one size fits all approach to academic safety, we can implement tangible, everyday practices to establish a safe academic environment for all.

As explained by Krall (2018), in his book entitled Necessary Conditions66 In Necessary Conditions, Krall discusses what he believes to be the three essential elements of pedagogy – academic safety, quality tasks, and effective teacher facilitation – that belong in every math classroom. Truly, these pedagogical elements belong in all classrooms. (focused on improving the teaching of secondary math), the foundational principle for creating an academically safe classroom is summed up in the following statement: “An academically safe classroom honors the individual as a mathematician and welcomes him or her into the social ecosystem77 “The term ecosystem is adapted from biology, where it has long been used to describe the populations of any defined area and their interactions with each other and their shared environment. In recent years, the term has also been used in anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics, political science, and business, frequently differentiated in many of these fields as a ‘social ecosystem’ rather than a biological or ecological one.” (Buckelew & Fishman 2010, Chapter 1). of math.” It may seem surprising that the foundational principle for creating an academically safe math classroom is to honor novice learners as mathematicians and to welcome them into the social ecosystem of math! But the intended underlying message of this statement is brilliant – to make the discipline of math accessible to all, rather than exclusive, that is, only for “certain types of students.” Additionally, the statement is meant to be an invitation for students to explore what mathematicians actually do and what dispositions they actually demonstrate and to develop their identity as mathematicians88 This invitation reminds me of the underlying message of the Making Scientists book by Light and Micari (2013). Based on their own transformative experiences, Light and Micari contend that the learning environment is just as critical to academic success in the sciences as a person's individual ability. As such, the book identifies and discusses six learning principles that characterize the environment in which the best science is conducted: 1) learning deeply; 2) engaging problems; 3) connecting peers; 4) mentoring learning; 5) creating community; and 6) doing research. Collectively, these six principles provide a practical framework for designing and implementing educational practices and innovations that are consistent with the actual practice of science. Instead of just the simple acquisition of facts about science, the focus of these principles is making scientists (Schmidt, 2018). .

The invitation to learn math as a member of the discipline of math lies in stark contrast to the more traditional approach taken in many math classes where students find themselves as passive observers, where their job is to watch the teacher solve math problems, taken out of a textbook, using rote, step‐by‐step procedures. After which, the students are instructed to solve the same type of problems for homework.

Before you read any further, please take a moment to convert the statement from the discipline of mathematics to your own discipline, to both put yourself in the shoes of a student entering that discipline and to allow the underlying intentions of statement to sink in. The discipline of __________ is open and accessible to you, and you are invited to explore what the members of this discipline actually do and what dispositions they actually demonstrate, and to develop your identity as a member of that discipline. This welcoming, open approach makes me want to be a part of the discipline, how about you? It is so much more inviting, encouraging, and engaging than the stated or implied message sometimes given to new students in challenging disciplines, "Look to your left, look to your right, because one of you won't be here by the end of the year.”99 An urban legend holds that incoming students at Harvard Law School are told to "Look to your left, look to your right, because one of you won't be here by the end of the year” (Kahlenberg, 1992). The novel entitled The Paper Chase by John Jay Osborn (1971) describes the same type of competitive environment at Harvard Law School.

Once we have implemented this foundational principle, what comes next for creating academic safety? Well, as stated by Krall (2018), “Once the door is open we must invite students in and clear the obstacles in the way.” The obstacles that Krall is referring to are not the challenges that help students develop intellectually and mature as a person (those need to stay), but rather they are the practices that have become part of the traditional school system that are no longer important or useful for educating today's students (Elmore & McPeak 2017, Hanstedt, 2018). We need to reimagine these practices, so we can present our students with a growth mindset view of education1010 It is common sense that if we want our student to have a growth mindset, the educational system and the practices used need to be growth mindset oriented. For more on the growth versus fixed mindset see Dweck (2006). , as well as of the disciplines we teach.

What are some of these classroom practices that have grown into obstacles, impeding our students’ academic safety and negatively impacting their ability and desire to learn? This is an important question for each of us to seriously consider at a deep level, as some obstacles are easier to identify (i.e., separating students into learning tracks, stereotyping) than others (e.g., social pressure, passive caring). Three potential obstacles that I would like us to consider are time, correctness, and grades1111 Krall (2018) does an inspiring job discussing these three obstacles and their associated transformed practices: time (thoughtfulness), correctness (effort), and grades (demonstration of knowledge) in relation to math in Chapter 3 Academic Safety. . Now more than ever (in these COVID‐19 pandemic times), we need to rethink all historic, ingrained practices, transforming them into “ones that prioritize academic safety and instill a growth mindset” in our students (Krall, 2018).

在1930年代的大萧条时期，在美国建造桥梁是一项危险的工作。例如，在1933–36年旧金山-奥克兰湾大桥的建设中，共有24名工人死亡（Kerievsky，2015年）。但是，金门大桥的建设却截然不同。它与海湾大桥同时建造，其操作更像是现代化的建筑工地，尤其是在安全性方面。1在金门大桥的建筑中实施的一些突破性的安全预防措施包括：1）将采矿头盔用于桥梁建设，以保护工人免受错误的飞行物体的侵害，2）采用第一种强制性安全帽区域，3）戴上防眩目镜，以保护工人免受阳光反射在水面的刺眼眩光； 4）提供特殊的乳霜，以保护工人的皮肤免受风灼伤； 5）为钢铁清洁工人提供创新的防毒面具，以保护他们免受伤害吸入有害物质，以及6）强制使用安全线或被抛弃的面部（Kerievsky，2015年）。。桥梁的首席建筑师约瑟夫·施特劳斯（Joseph Strauss）使用了最新的安全设备，接受了安全培训，程序和监督，作为工作的组成部分，发明了新的安全设备，并强制执行了安全程序。施特劳斯（Strauss）相信，他们“……可以通过为工人提供所有已知的安全装置来欺骗死亡”（Kerievsky，2015年）。

当开始建造桥梁的道路时，Strauss设想了“有史以来用于大型建筑工地的最昂贵，最精致的安全装置” –将在新兴道路下方设置安全网（Kerievsky，2015年，图1）。 ）。该网的成本为130,000美元，在当时是一笔不小的数目，尤其是考虑到这座桥梁是在大萧条的黑暗经济时期建造的。尽管付出了高昂的代价，施特劳斯仍在努力争取并获得了使用该网的批准。你问结果如何？安全网的存在提高了士气22 “无论您的身高有多高，被击倒的力度有多大，您仍然会掉入网中。” 摘录自视频《金门大桥施工期间的工人安全》（Danieljbmitchell 2007）。 ，加快了工作速度33 “生命的丧失，由于男人工作得慢一些而导致的延误，因为他们必须更加小心，以免跌倒，这可能使这130,000美元成为非常经济的创新。” 摘录自录像带，题为“金门大桥施工期间的工人安全”（Danieljbmitchell 2007）。 ，并挽救了19条生命44从金门大桥落下并被安全网救出的19名男子为自己组织了一个独家俱乐部，称其为“通往地狱俱乐部的中途之路（Half Way to Hell Club 2020）”。。最终，只有11人丧生55在项目的前44个月中，没有人员伤亡。但是，在该项目仅剩七个月的时间里，1936年10月，一名工人被支撑梁压倒，1937年2月16日，一个重达5吨的平台倒塌，穿过安全网，使12人坠入了220英尺的高空下面的冰冷水域。这12名工人中有10名因秋天丧生，致死总数达到11人（Kerievsky，2015年）。根据当时的经验法则，每花费一百万美元，就会失去1条生命，因此建造金门大桥的人数远少于预计的35人。今天，金门大桥是旧金山湾区的标志性标志，对于那些知道其历史的人来说，它是工人安全的里程碑。

尽管我真的不记得我是如何或何时第一次了解施特劳斯所使用的安全网及其成功成果的，但我最近一直在思考施特劳斯的革命性思维方式，但是在保持桥梁工人安全方面并没有那么多，而是与确保学生安全有关。

尽管我们可以讨论学生安全的几个方面，但是我现在想到的领域是学术安全。出于学术安全考虑，我的意思是使我们的教室成为学生从事工作的安全可靠的场所。就像桥上的工人在工作中感到身体安全一样，我希望我的学生在学业上也感到安全，即他们从事探索，学习，成长和变化的工作。我所谈论的那种学术安全的预期目的不是抚慰或哄骗我们的学生，而是帮助他们在课堂内外成为自己最好的版本。

创造一个让所有学生都感到学业安全的环境是一项艰巨的任务。可以这么说，学生们以各种“形状和大小”来到我们这里，并带来了如此多样的背景和能力。尽管我们需要考虑一种超越所有方法的适用于学术安全的方法，但是我们可以实施切实可行的日常实践，为所有人建立一个安全的学术环境。

正如Krall（2018）在其题为《必要条件》 6的书中所述6在必要条件下，克拉尔讨论了他认为教学法的三个基本要素-学术安全，质量任务和有效的教师促进-属于每个数学课堂。确实，这些教学法元素属于所有教室。 （着重于改进中学数学的教学），以下陈述总结了创建学术上安全的教室的基本原则：“学术上安全的教室表彰作为数学家的个人，并欢迎他或她进入社会生态系统7。7 “生态系统一词是从生物学改编而来的，长期以来它一直被用来描述任何定义区域的种群及其相互之间的相互作用以及它们共同的环境。近年来，该术语还被用于人类学，社会学，心理学，经济学，政治学和商业领域，在许多这些领域中经常被区分为“社会生态系统”，而不是生物学或生态领域。” （Buckelew＆Fishman 2010，第1章）。数学。” 令人惊讶的是，创建一个学术上安全的数学教室的基本原则是要尊重作为数学家的新手学习者，并欢迎他们加入数学的社会生态系统！但是，此声明的预期基本信息是出色的-使数学学科对所有人开放，而不是排他性的，也就是说，仅适用于“某些类型的学生”。此外，该声明还旨在邀请学生探索数学家的实际行为，他们实际表现出的性情，并发展他们作为数学家的身份88这一邀请让我想起的基本信息的制作科学家通过光与Micari书（2013）。根据他们自己的变革经验，Light和Micari认为学习环境对于个人在科学领域的学术成功至关重要。因此，这本书确定并讨论了六项学习原则，这些原则表征了进行最佳科学的环境：1）深入学习；2）引人入胜的问题；3）连接对等体；4）指导学习；5）创建社区；6）做研究。这六项原则共同为设计和实施与科学实践相一致的教育实践和创新提供了实用的框架。这些原则的重点不仅仅是培养有关科学的事实，还在于培养科学家（Schmidt，2018）。 。

邀请数学成为数学学科的一员，与许多数学课程中采用的更为传统的方法形成鲜明对比，在传统的方法中，学生发现自己是被动的观察者，他们的工作是观察老师解决数学问题的能力，这是从数学中脱颖而出的。使用死记硬背的分步程序的教科书。之后，指导学生解决相同类型的家庭作业问题。

在继续阅读之前，请花一点时间将陈述从数学学科转换为您自己的学科，既让自己陷入进入该学科的学生的角色，又让陈述的内在意图沉入其中。 __________的学科是开放的，可供您使用，并且邀请您探索该学科的成员实际从事的工作和处置方式他们实际上展示了自己，并发展了您作为该学科成员的身份。这种欢迎，开放的态度使我想成为该学科的一员，您呢？它比有时向具有挑战性的学科的新生提供的明示或暗示的信息更具吸引力，鼓励和参与，“向左看，向右看，因为你们中的一个人到年底都不会在这里年。” 99都市传说认为，哈佛法学院的新生被告知：“向左看，向右看，因为你们中的一个人到年底都不会到这里来”（Kahlenberg，1992）。约翰·杰伊·奥斯本（John Jay Osborn，1971）题为“纸质追逐”的论文描述了哈佛大学法学院的同类型竞争环境。

一旦我们实施了这一基本原则，接下来将如何创建学术安全？好吧，正如Krall（2018）所说，“一旦门打开，我们就必须邀请学生加入并清除路上的障碍。” Krall所指的障碍不是帮助学生在智力上成长和成为一个人（需要留下来）的挑战，而是成为已成为传统学校系统一部分的实践，不再重要或无用。教育当今学生的方式（Elmore＆McPeak 2017，Hanstedt，2018）。我们需要重新构想这些做法，以便向学生展示成长心态的教育观1010常识是，如果我们希望我们的学生具有成长心态，则所使用的教育系统和实践必须以成长心态为导向。有关增长与固定思维方式的更多信息，请参阅Dweck（2006）。 ，以及我们所教授的学科。

这些课堂实践中有哪些已成为障碍，阻碍了我们学生的学业安全并对他们的学习能力和学习欲望产生了负面影响？这是我们每个人都必须认真思考的一个重要问题，因为某些障碍比其他障碍（例如，社会压力，消极关怀）更容易识别（即，将学生分为学习轨道，刻板印象）。我希望我们考虑的三个潜在障碍是时间，正确性和成绩1111 Krall（2018）做了一个鼓舞人心的工作，在第3章``学术安全''中讨论了与数学相关的这三个障碍及其相关的转换实践：时间（思想），正确性（努力）和成绩（证明知识）。。现在比以往任何时候都更重要（在COVID-19大流行时期），我们需要重新思考所有历史悠久的根深蒂固的做法，将其转变为“优先考虑学术安全并灌输成长思维方式的做法”（Krall，2018年）。